S. Emanuel Lin v. Chicago Title Insurance Compan

MEMORANDUM

S. Emanuel Lin appeals pro se from the district court’s judgment in his diversity action alleging claims based on defendant’s failure to discover and disclose an easement on Lin’s property when issuing him title insurance. We have jurisdiction under 28 U.S.C. § 1291 . We review de novo. Torres v. City of Los Angeles, 548 F.3d 1197, 1205 (9th Cir.2008) (judgment as a matter of law); Fairbanks N. Star Borough v. U.S. Army Corps of Eng’rs, 543 F.3d 586, 591 (9th Cir.2008) (judgment on the pleadings); Kahle v. Gonzales, 487 F.3d 697, 699 (9th Cir.2007) (dismissal under Fed.R.Civ.P. 12). We affirm.

The district court properly dismissed Lin’s negligence claims because California law precludes negligence claims based on a title insurer’s failure to disclose an encumbrance. See Southland Title Corp. v. Superior Court, 231 Cal.App.3d 530 , 282 Cal.Rptr. 425, 429 (1991) (explaining the limited grounds for a negligence claim against a title insurer and that “[a] title insurance policy is ‘... a contract to indemnify against loss caused by defects in the title or encumbrances on the title. It is not a representation that the title is in any particular condition.’ ” (citation…